Here’s the highlight of the article:
"Half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, and nearly half of those are terminated," Clinton said. "Making contraception more accessible and affordable is critical to reducing the number of unintended pregnancies."I don’t doubt Ms. Clinton is very bright and understands that the most unswerving pro-lifers aren't looking to contraception to avoid "unintended pregnancies." On the contrary; her language represents a broken, upside-down view of the role of sexuality and its blessings. Many pro-lifers understand that sexual union between a husband and wife is a reflection of the triune communion of God and our chance to participate in God's gift to us through sacramental marriage and the distinctly conjugal expression of love. When a child is the result of this love, it is as joyous and profound as the universe itself is recreated at the creation of another new body and soul. I'm sure there are other pro-lifers who take other views, such as the equal protection of every person (regardless of physiology or mortally-dependent relationships) under the Constitution. The pro-life movement is rich in understanding the significance of life and its creation. Until eschaton, fallen man will engage in extra-martial sex, it is naive to suggest otherwise. Dispensing jimmy caps isn’t a true or “mid-way” remedy. It's an encouragement to dissolution of the integrity of being; it's a trajectory in the wrong direction.
Clinton, who strongly favors abortion rights, went on to call her proposal a place "where people on both sides of the abortion debate can come together to reach common ground."
So then, in a faint echo of Kerry’s attempt to legitimize a Catholic schism in the American Church, is the real goal the splintering the pro-life movement? As we’ve seen in the past, only the abortionists and the mainstream media buy this "new again, old again" position. Remember Jocelyn Elders’ "Every child a wanted child?" Remember which crowd bought that nonsense?